Pelosi: "Natural Gas is a Transition Fuel"

Pelosi on Meet the Press:

Well, the fact of the matter is--and the president knows this--is that if you drill offshore today, you won't have any impact at the price at the pump for 10 years, and then, it's 2 cents. We can move much quickly by releasing oil from the strategic petroleum reserve and having an impact at the pump in 10 days, in 10 days.

Her first point is debatable. Expectation of future supply does play a role in the market today. As for her second point, tapping our oil reserve is hardly a sustainable long-term strategy.

So why is--this is the oil company position, to drill offshore without any comprehensive approach to other aspects of it.

I'm not particularly interested in what the oil company position is, but as far as Republicans go, I've already argued this is a straw-man.

You can have a transition with natural gas. You can have a transition with natural gas. That, that is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels. So, so there is a way to transition this instead of doing more of the same.

How long will it take to retrofit existing gas stations to serve up natural gas? How many cars today can run on natural gas? Even if car makers started making natural gas based cars today, how long would it be until those new vehicles start trickling down to poor Americans? In the meantime, how much will those poor Americans be paying to fill up their old gasoline-fueled vehicles?

Wrong Rating: 3 out of 4 (gross distortion)

McCain: "Now Is The Time to Drill"

McCain, visiting an oil platform (and visibly sea-sick?), said:

"Americans across our country are hurting, as we all know, because of the cost of energy. Gas prices are through the roof. Energy costs have seeped into our grocery bills, making it more expensive to feed our families. Now as we prepare for the winter, it's time for us to be more serious about our home heating oil needs. ... And that means we need to start drilling offshore, at advanced oil rigs like this one."

Umm... winter comes every year. When was it time to become more serious about offshore drilling? I don't know, maybe 10 years ago, when McCain opposed it?

More from the oil platform:

"Our nation is sending $700 billion overseas every year to countries that don't like us very much. When I'm president that's going to stop. We're going to achieve energy independence, and we're going to do it by using every resource at our disposal to get the job done, including new offshore drilling."

I think the term "flip-flop" is thrown around way too much these days. People should be allowed to change their mind when the situation changes. In fact, this is how McCain has defended his change of heart. He claims his new position is based on two facts:

1) The cost of gas has increased, which is an immediate hardship on American families, and the cost is likely to continue increasing.

2) We are sending $700 billion overseas to "countries that don't like us very much." That money should be staying here.

I agree with both of those points. The problem, though, is that those facts aren't really different than they were 10 years ago. Did anyone seriously think that oil prices weren't going to increase? Did anyone seriously think that there wasn't going to be more demand, forcing us to import more oil from foreign countries? These realities are not new. McCain should have recognized them 10 years ago, and advocated more drilling then. So I don't let McCain off the hook with the "I change my mind when the facts on the ground change" excuse. This seems like a classic example of "lack of judgment" if I ever saw one. Of course, the democrats claiming, "it won't help for 10 years" isn't any better, considering they opposed it 10 years ago too!

Wrong Rating: 2 out of 4 (misrepresentation)

Pelosi: "Republicans Just Want to Drill"

Nancy Pelosi says that the problem with the Republican position is that they want to vote on drilling as a single measure. She says if they would present it as part of a comprehensive energy plan, she would allow a vote.



The problem with that is that Democrats said they would not allow an amendment to the energy bill they introduced, which would, in affect, have caused the bill to become a comprehensive bill that included drilling, which Pelosi now says would be acceptable. Huh?

Democrats love to argue that "we can't drill our way out of this problem." In doing so they set up a straw-man, and frankly I'm confused why the Republicans won't call them on it. It's true that drilling alone won't solve the problem. But the same argument can be made for every other energy source. That's why we need a comprehensive plan that includes every viable energy source. The Democrats pride themselves on championing such a plan, but the truth is that the Republican plan is actually more comprehensive, since it includes everything in the democratic plan, plus oil and nuclear energy.

Wrong Rating: 2 out of 4 (misrepresentation) -- Would have been higher except that Republicans don't seem eager to clear up the confusion.

McCain: "Obama's Energy Plan is Tire Pressure"

McCain, mocking Obama's comment that properly inflating tires would save as much oil as drilling would produce:



To suggest that properly inflating tires is Obama's entire energy plan (or even a significant part of it) goes beyond exaggeration to an outright lie.

Wrong Rating: 3 out of 4 (gross distortion)

Obama: "Fill Up Your Tires"

Obama on inflating your tires:



Even if this is true, the idea that every single American with low tire pressure is going to go and fill up their tires just because the president says they should is crazy. He may be right, but if it never happens then the oil is not saved. And in any case, why does this mean we can't drill? If we can save just as much oil by filling up are tires as we can by drilling, then why not do both and save oil while producing more at the same time? Why do we need to choose between the two?

Wrong Rating: 1 out of 4 (spin) -- I gave him some credit that what he's saying might technically be true, although irrelevant to the drilling debate.

McCain: "Economists Are Wrong"

McCain on "This Week With George Stephanopoulos:"

MCCAIN: There are many steps that can be taken absolutely, including the gas tax holiday. Everybody -- everybody...

STEPHANOPOULOS: Not a single economist in the country said it'd work.

MCCAIN: Yes. And there's no economist in the country that knows very well the low-income American who drives the furthest, in the oldest automobile, that sometimes can't even afford to go to work.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But they all say that that's...

MCCAIN: And they haven't met...

STEPHANOPOULOS: ... not who's (ph) going to get the benefit. The oil companies, the gas companies are going to absorb...

MCCAIN: You know, they..

STEPHANOPOULOS: ... any reduction.

MCCAIN: ... they say that. But one, it didn't happen before, and two, we wouldn't let it happen. We wouldn't let it -- Americans wouldn't let them absorb that.

STEPHANOPOULOS: How would you prevent that?

MCCAIN: We would make them shamed into it. We, of course, know how to -- American public opinion. And we would penalize them, if necessary. But they wouldn't. They would pass it on.

Silly economists for forgotting about the role of the invisible hand of shame in the free market system. Don't you remember the supply/shame graphs from Econ 101?

Wrong Rating: 1 out of 4 (spin)